IMPORTANT: JREF Forums is now the International Skeptics Forum. If you are a past member of the JREF Forums you must agree to the new terms and conditions to post, send PMs, or continue to use the forum as a member. You can view them here, or you will be presented with them when you try to make a post or PM or similar.

Your private information was removed in transferring to the new forum. If you'd like to import it please see the instructions in this thread to approve transfer.
If you are having problems accessing the Forum you can contact Darat at isforum@internationalskeptics.com, please include your username and forum email address in any email.
NOTE:** TAPATALK access is currently disabled **. This is just while we work out how to ensure people have to agree to the T&Cs before posting here via Tapatalk

Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Did it impair the Sandy Hook shooter? The Virginia tech shooter would have had to reload a total of 2 more times if magazine bans were in effect.

Have you practiced changing a magazine in a firearm?

It impaired Gabby Gifford's shooter. Was that just a fluke?

And yes, i have changed magazines in a pistol. It took about ten seconds but i wasn't in a hurry. But it wasn't a stressful situation either.

Every reload is a chance to be neutralized...there is a reason armies like larger magazines.

__________________All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

Right, because i did a very casual target shooting session, I'm weak. Why do armies like bigger magazines?

__________________All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

I've stripped a pistol in about two minutes. Didn't want to be fast so didn't care to try.

Why a thirty round mag and not a fiver? If a better magazine were developed that didn't jam, would it be preferable?

__________________All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

There are constant improvements on the standard mags. You mean to tell me you didn't know that either?

Doesn't matter. You're arguing about technology. You're not addressing why warriors want the bigger magazines that work without jamming.

__________________All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

Really? You're afraid that an inanimate object could sprout legs and hands, walk to you, and pull it's own trigger? Awesome.

It is. Quite.

Can you elaborate? I'm not sure if that is a thinly veiled insult or not.

It's pretty clear that it is not the chunk of metal that he's scared of--which kinda makes your (and most of us gun owners') point.

__________________"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriadhttp://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275

Doesn't matter. You're arguing about technology. You're not addressing why warriors want the bigger magazines that work without jamming.

Oooh...warriors!

Here's Colion Noir to explain it for you:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

Born in San Antonio, raised in northern Arkansas. Live in northern Virginia. But what does it matter? Does it make my opinion count more or less than someone in Europe say or Australia, or Canada? Does it mean more if you know that I'm an Army veteran??

Either you have a reasoned rebuttal to my opinion or you don't. (shrug) I just put it out there, I wasn't really inviting debate. What I wrote really isn't debatable. It's just the culmination of the despair I feel after talking about this subject with you folks. There was once a time on this board when I had much to learn...looks like the JREF forum doesn't have a thing to teach me any longer unless it's how entropy chips away at the quality of antiquated social media haunts...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

So the main part of his argument is that he wants an assault rifle to defend himself from attackers who are also armed with assault rifles. I am so glad I do not live somewhere with that kind of fear.

Since there are so many assault rifles in civilian and criminal hands in the USA I think it is pointless to ban them.

Not only that, but because with that level of ownership their use in crimes is remarkably low.

Feinstein is a fanatic. Her fixation on "assault weapons" is not derived from actual crime rates. Frankly I don't know where it comes from, other than phobia.

I haven't seen the video you refer to, but that mindset hasn't been my experience WRT people who own military-style semiautomatics (myself included).

__________________"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

So the main part of his argument is that he wants an assault rifle to defend himself from attackers who are also armed with assault rifles. I am so glad I do not live somewhere with that kind of fear.

Since there are so many assault rifles in civilian and criminal hands in the USA I think it is pointless to ban them.

Why is there always this insistence to attribute gun owner's motives to fear and paranoia? Is it a passive aggressive thing? Is it to get a rise out of the gun owners? Is it simply that foreigners and gun grabbers hate guns so much that they can't think of any other reason to own firearms?

Again, back to my point about "preppers". Preparing for emergencies is just common sense. For example, my car. I have a 4 and a 5 year old. This time of year I have blankets in the trunk, along with my regular repair kit and first aid kit, and I always dress myself and my kids like we're going to have to get out and walk. I keep my cell phone fully charged at all times.

I have a new 2012 car and drive on (usually well plowed and maintained) roads. It doesn't snow much around here, and when it does, it's (usually) cleaned up quickly. The chances of being stuck and actually having to use the supplies, or walk anywhere--close to none. However, I don't think anyone would criticize me for taking these precautions.

But the fact that I carry a gun in case **** happens--well that's unforgivable! The kids might grab my gun off my hip and shoot themselves! That's as unlikely as getting stuck in a remote place with no cell service, but it's a scary gun!

I agree banning assault guns is a waste of time and I cannot see her reasoning for it considering handguns are used far more for crime and it is the criminals and nuts that need guns taking off them.

Maybe because if handguns were banned, she wouldn't be able to carry one herself.

(To be fair, she claims she doesn't do that anymore. But when she did, she was the only one in San Francisco allowed to...and I'm sure being mayor had nothing to do with it.)

I think her reasoning is the same as the Wedge Strategy. Even other gun owners sometimes have a hard time wrapping their head around someone wanting an AR-15 (or what have you). So pick on the unpopular minority for now and wait for it to pick up momentum later. All speculation of course.

As I've said before, politicians like stuff like this because it's easy, doesn't risk their jobs as much (arguable, giving the 1996 mid-terms), and prevents having to do the heavy lifting of really solving problems...like getting guns out of the hands of criminals and maniacs.

__________________"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

Why is there always this insistence to attribute gun owner's motives to fear and paranoia? Is it a passive aggressive thing? Is it to get a rise out of the gun owners? Is it simply that foreigners and gun grabbers hate guns so much that they can't think of any other reason to own firearms?

He wants an assault rifle to protect himself from criminals from assault rifles. I am glad I do not have the need to do such a thing. There, less emotive, happier now? Have you got a better understanding of what I was saying?

Quote:

Again, back to my point about "preppers". Preparing for emergencies is just common sense. For example, my car. I have a 4 and a 5 year old. This time of year I have blankets in the trunk, along with my regular repair kit and first aid kit, and I always dress myself and my kids like we're going to have to get out and walk. I keep my cell phone fully charged at all times.

I have a new 2012 car and drive on (usually well plowed and maintained) roads. It doesn't snow much around here, and when it does, it's (usually) cleaned up quickly. The chances of being stuck and actually having to use the supplies, or walk anywhere--close to none. However, I don't think anyone would criticize me for taking these precautions.

I can understand why you feel the need to arm yourself to protect you and your family from other armed people, especially the criminals and nuts. What I do not follow is why about 40% of Americans feel that need and the other 60% do not (based on estimated figures of how many adults own guns in the USA). Then of those gun owners many have more than one gun.

I know you do not like the fear word, but it does seem to come down to fear of crime as opposed to actual chance of crime that dictates whether you want a gun or not.

Quote:

But the fact that I carry a gun in case **** happens--well that's unforgivable! The kids might grab my gun off my hip and shoot themselves! That's as unlikely as getting stuck in a remote place with no cell service, but it's a scary gun!

What do you think of Americans who are not taking precautions by not owning a gun?

So the main part of his argument is that he wants an assault rifle to defend himself from attackers who are also armed with assault rifles. I am so glad I do not live somewhere with that kind of fear.

I watched the video and while he said self defense was scary, lived in a non-utopian society and wanted to be able to use a semi-auto rifle to defend himself if required, I do not recall him claiming he was in fear of anything. Where did you hear this?

They are either, unfortunately, living in a jurisdiction that severely restricts their rights, or live in a fantasy land where the government will always be there,in time to protect them.

Law abiding citizens can still get guns in the more restrictive states. It seems odd for gun owners to say they need a gun for defence, but do not have a fear of crime. Unless they are vigilantes at heart, living in hope of an opportunity to shoot a criminal.

Law abiding citizens can still get guns in the more restrictive states. It seems odd for gun owners to say they need a gun for defence, but do not have a fear of crime. Unless they are vigilantes at heart, living in hope of an opportunity to shoot a criminal.

False dichotomy.

I have a fire extinguisher at my house that I keep handy and refill when needed. Yet I don't live in fear of fires or hope one starts so I can put it out.

__________________"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

I watched the video and while he said self defense was scary, lived in a non-utopian society and wanted to be able to use a semi-auto rifle to defend himself if required, I do not recall him claiming he was in fear of anything. Where did you hear this?

Ranb

Fear of crime is a recognised term, the subject of much academic study. It does not mean out and out fear where you are literally scared all the time. There are people with no fear of crime.

But to say you have no fear and yet you still feel the need to arm yourself against criminals suggests you are not really telling the truth. Actions speaking louder than words.

Or maybe there are people who need a gun as a prop, a security blanket to make them feel safe.

Fear of crime is a recognised term, the subject of much academic study. It does not mean out and out fear where you are literally scared all the time. There are people with no fear of crime.

But to say you have no fear and yet you still feel the need to arm yourself against criminals suggests you are not really telling the truth. Actions speaking louder than words.

Or maybe there are people who need a gun as a prop, a security blanket to make them feel safe.

These people should not have guns, IMHO.

__________________"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

The color code, as originally introduced by Jeff Cooper, had nothing to do with tactical situations or alertness levels, but rather with one's state of mind. As taught by Cooper, it relates to the degree of peril you are willing to do something about and which allows you to move from one level of mindset to another to enable you to properly handle a given situation. Cooper did not claim to have invented anything in particular with the color code, but he was apparently the first to use it as an indication of mental state.[6]

White: Unaware and unprepared. If attacked in Condition White, the only thing that may save you is the inadequacy or ineptitude of your attacker. When confronted by something nasty, your reaction will probably be "Oh my God! This can't be happening to me."

Yellow: Relaxed alert. No specific threat situation. Your mindset is that "today could be the day I may have to defend myself". You are simply aware that the world is a potentially unfriendly place and that you are prepared to defend yourself, if necessary. You use your eyes and ears, and realize that "I may have to shoot today". You don't have to be armed in this state, but if you are armed you should be in Condition Yellow. You should always be in Yellow whenever you are in unfamiliar surroundings or among people you don't know. You can remain in Yellow for long periods, as long as you are able to "Watch your six." (In aviation 12 o'clock refers to the direction in front of the aircraft's nose. Six o'clock is the blind spot behind the pilot.) In Yellow, you are "taking in" surrounding information in a relaxed but alert manner, like a continuous 360 degree radar sweep. As Cooper put it, "I might have to shoot."

The majority of folks, even gun owners, are perpetually in "Condition White". Some prefer to be in "Condition Yellow". It's not fear, but awareness. eta: as in the article, note that the conditions have nothing to do with being armed, it's simply a state of mind.

They want to minimize reload time and frequency. Now tell me why that is.

__________________All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

I think we are arguing about semantics. I am talking about fear of crime where you can no fear of crime or a bit or some or lots.

I am not inclined to believe someone who has guns for defence who says they have no fear of crime compared to someone who has no guns for defence.

Perhaps. What you call "fear" and others would call "paranoia", I simply call "preparedness". I've been robbed several times, twice by people I knew. If I had been home, I would have been a witness able to identify them.

I own a Remington 870. That's a general purpose shotgun as far as I'm concerned. It can be used for home defense if need be and won't penetrate the walls.

Where I live isn't terribly bad, but break-ins do occur from time to time. I don't expect to ever confront a burglar. I hope I don't. But I have limited ways out of my house if someone came in the back door. Also I'm disabled, so running for it is out even if I could get out my window. In the event that I have a close encounter of the worst kind, I want to be prepared for it.

__________________"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

The majority of folks, even gun owners, are perpetually in "Condition White". Some prefer to be in "Condition Yellow". It's not fear, but awareness. eta: as in the article, note that the conditions have nothing to do with being armed, it's simply a state of mind.

Paranoia is a state of mind

__________________All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

The majority of folks, even gun owners, are perpetually in "Condition White". Some prefer to be in "Condition Yellow". It's not fear, but awareness.

I see he likes semantics as well. I have read that before and think he is one of the reasons why so many gun owners think they can present themselves as having no fear to no gun owners, but the gun acts to send out a contrary signal they do fear crime. Either that or they are a vigilante.

Perhaps. What you call "fear" and others would call "paranoia", I simply call "preparedness". I've been robbed several times, twice by people I knew. If I had been home, I would have been a witness able to identify them.

I own a Remington 870. That's a general purpose shotgun as far as I'm concerned. It can be used for home defense if need be and won't penetrate the walls.

Where I live isn't terribly bad, but break-ins do occur from time to time. I don't expect to ever confront a burglar. I hope I don't. But I have limited ways out of my house if someone came in the back door. Also I'm disabled, so running for it is out even if I could get out my window. In the event that I have a close encounter of the worst kind, I want to be prepared for it.

The majority of folks, even gun owners, are perpetually in "Condition White". Some prefer to be in "Condition Yellow". It's not fear, but awareness. eta: as in the article, note that the conditions have nothing to do with being armed, it's simply a state of mind.

Glad you brought that up.

I'm in "yellow" quite a bit of the time - not because fear, but because of habit. In my days as a rent-a-cop I was also a de facto early warning system for building issues when maintenance couldn't be there, so I mentally trained myself to be aware of my surroundings nearly all the time. After eight years it became second nature.

It comes in handy these days when I work around tigers. Also great for trips to the woods and spotting wildlife that has a knack for staying hidden.

__________________"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

I can accept that, and I'm not insulted by it. I've also been the victim of violent crime in the greater metroplex, just not near my house.

__________________"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

I see he likes semantics as well. I have read that before and think he is one of the reasons why so many gun owners think they can present themselves as having no fear to no gun owners, but the gun acts to send out a contrary signal they do fear crime. Either that or they are a vigilante.

Does insurance of any kind send out signals of fear to you? Its purpose is to defray the cost of unlikely events. People that are aware that accidents/theft/sickness/etc. happen prefer to have insurance.

I don't stock my car for fear of getting into a mess, I do it because I am aware that being prepared is the intelligent thing to do.

Perhaps it is semantics, and in that case perhaps words can be chosen that are least likely to offend and close off discussion.